Re: [lir-wg] New Draft in-addr.arpa Policy Document - Reminder
From owner-lir-wg@ripe.net Thu Jun 20 12:15:28 2002 From: Paul Rendek <ncc@ripe.net>
Dear all,
This is a reminder that the deadline for comments and suggestions for the draft in-addr policy document is set for Monday, 24 June 2002. The new draft "Reverse Address Delegation Under 'in-addr.arpa' in the RIPE NCC Service Region" document can be found on our website at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/mem-services/registration/policies/draft-documen...
All comments and suggestions should be sent to <lir-wg@ripe.net>.
I would have a short question and a suggestion for clarification. 1. Is the last paragraph of 3.0 not superfluous in the light of the last paragraph of 5.0? 3.0: "LIRs should maintain DNS resource records for address space assigned to End Users from their own address space, even if the user obtains connectivity from a different LIR." 5.0: "LIRs should provide reverse delegation corresponding to an assignment during the complete validity period of the assignment." I mean that my understanding is that for 3.0 there are two cases: the end-user either _changes_ its provider, in which case they will have to renumber, and during renumbering their assignment is valid, i.e. the old LIR has to provide reverse DNS according to 5.0 during renumbering, or the end-user becomes multi-homed, therefore they will keep the old address space for which they obviously will need reverse DNS (on the long run) that the old LIR is again supposed to provide, based on 5.0. Am I missing something? 2. I think the intent of first paragraph of 3.0 is to accept a reverse delegation of an address block as soon as there is ANY address space assigned from it (i.e not ALL has to be assigned prior to reverse delegation), assuming that the whole block has been allocated to that LIR (this is relevant only for /16s). Therfore I suggest something like: "The RIPE NCC accepts requests for reverse delegation solely for address space that HAD BEEN ALLOCATED TO THE REQUESTING LIR AND AT LEAST ONE PORTION OF WHICH has been registered by the LIR as assigned to End Users in the RIPE Whois Database." (You will probably find a better word than "portion" to describe this). Best regards, Janos
On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 11:32:21AM +0200, Janos Zsako wrote: Re: Re: [lir-wg] New Draft in-addr.arpa Policy Document - Reminder [...]
I would have a short question and a suggestion for clarification.
1. Is the last paragraph of 3.0 not superfluous in the light of the last paragraph of 5.0?
3.0: "LIRs should maintain DNS resource records for address space assigned to End Users from their own address space, even if the user obtains connectivity from a different LIR."
5.0: "LIRs should provide reverse delegation corresponding to an assignment during the complete validity period of the assignment."
Good point. We'll make the change. [...]
2. I think the intent of first paragraph of 3.0 is to accept a reverse delegation of an address block as soon as there is ANY address space assigned from it (i.e not ALL has to be assigned prior to reverse delegation), assuming that the whole block has been allocated to that LIR (this is relevant only for /16s). Therfore I suggest something like:
"The RIPE NCC accepts requests for reverse delegation solely for address space that HAD BEEN ALLOCATED TO THE REQUESTING LIR AND AT LEAST ONE PORTION OF WHICH has been registered by the LIR as assigned to End Users in the RIPE Whois Database."
(You will probably find a better word than "portion" to describe this).
Good point. We will incorporate a suitable change. Regards, -- leo vegoda RIPE NCC, Registration Services Assistant Manager
participants (2)
-
Janos Zsako -
leo vegoda